Drosophila oocyte proteome composition covaries with female mating status.
Animals
Calcium-Binding Proteins
/ classification
Carrier Proteins
/ classification
Copulation
/ physiology
Drosophila Proteins
/ classification
Drosophila melanogaster
/ genetics
Female
Fertilization
/ genetics
Gene Expression Profiling
Gene Expression Regulation
Gene Ontology
Genetic Fitness
Male
Membrane Proteins
/ classification
Molecular Sequence Annotation
Oocytes
/ cytology
Oogenesis
/ genetics
Protein Biosynthesis
Proteome
/ classification
Spermatozoa
/ cytology
Zygote
/ cytology
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 02 2021
04 02 2021
Historique:
received:
14
09
2020
accepted:
19
01
2021
entrez:
5
2
2021
pubmed:
6
2
2021
medline:
16
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Oocyte composition can directly influence offspring fitness, particularly in oviparous species such as most insects, where it is the primary form of parental investment. Oocyte production is also energetically costly, dependent on female condition and responsive to external cues. Here, we investigated whether mating influences mature oocyte composition in Drosophila melanogaster using a quantitative proteomic approach. Our analyses robustly identified 4,485 oocyte proteins and revealed that stage-14 oocytes from mated females differed significantly in protein composition relative to oocytes from unmated females. Proteins forming a highly interconnected network enriched for translational machinery and transmembrane proteins were increased in oocytes from mated females, including calcium binding and transport proteins. This mating-induced modulation of oocyte maturation was also significantly associated with proteome changes that are known to be triggered by egg activation. We propose that these compositional changes are likely to have fitness consequences and adaptive implications given the importance of oocyte protein composition, rather than active gene expression, to the maternal-to-zygotic transition and early embryogenesis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33542461
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-82801-4
pii: 10.1038/s41598-021-82801-4
pmc: PMC7862673
doi:
Substances chimiques
Calcium-Binding Proteins
0
Carrier Proteins
0
Drosophila Proteins
0
Membrane Proteins
0
Proteome
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3142Subventions
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : R21 HD088910
Pays : United States
Références
Thornhill, R. Sexual selection and paternal investment in insects. Am. Nat. 110, 153–163 (1976).
doi: 10.1086/283055
Trivers, R. L. Parental investment and sexual selection. In Sexual selection and the Decent of Man, 1871–1971 (ed. Campbell, B.) 136–179 (Aldine, Venice, 1972).
Armstrong, A. R. Drosophila melanogaster as a model for nutrient regulation of ovarian function. Reproduction 159, R69–R82 (2020).
doi: 10.1530/REP-18-0593
pubmed: 31491744
Chapman, T. & Partridge, L. Female fitness in Drosophila melanogaster: An interaction between the effect of nutrition and of encounter rate with males. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263, 755–759 (1996).
doi: 10.1098/rspb.1996.0113
Wheeler, D. The role of nourishment in oogenesis. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 41, 407–431 (1996).
pubmed: 15012335
doi: 10.1146/annurev.en.41.010196.002203
Boggs, C. L. Male nuptial fifts: Phenotypic consequences and evolutionary implications. In Insect Reproduction (eds Leather, S. R. & Hardie, J.) 215–242 (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2018).
doi: 10.1201/9781351073608-10
Lewis, S. & South, A. The evolution of animal nuptial gifts. Adv. Study Behav. 44, 53–97 (2012).
doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-394288-3.00002-2
Engqvist, L. Nuptial gift consumption influences female remating in a scorpionfly: Male or female control of mating rate?. Evol. Ecol. 21, 49–61 (2007).
doi: 10.1007/s10682-006-9123-y
Gwynne, D. T. Courtship feeding increases female reproductive success in bushcrickets. Nature 307, 361–363 (1984).
doi: 10.1038/307361a0
Karlsson, B. Nuptial gifts, resource budgets, and reproductive output in a polyandrous butterfly. Ecology 79, 2931–2940 (1998).
doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(1998)079[2931:NGRBAR]2.0.CO;2
Rönn, J. L., Katvala, M. & Arnqvist, G. Interspecific variation in ejaculate allocation and associated effects on female fitness in seed beetles. J. Evol. Biol. 21, 461–470 (2008).
pubmed: 18205778
doi: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2007.01493.x
Simmons, L. W. Nuptial feeding in tettigoniids male costs and the rates of fecundity increase. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 27, 43–47 (1990).
doi: 10.1007/BF00183312
Steele, R. H. Courtship feeding in Drosophila subobscura: The nutritional significance of courtship feeding. Anim. Behav. 34, 1087–1098 (1986).
doi: 10.1016/S0003-3472(86)80168-3
Gwynne, D. T. Courtship feeding and the Fitness of female katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). Evolution 42, 545–555 (1988).
pubmed: 28564010
doi: 10.2307/2409038
Reinhold, K. Paternal investment in Poecilimon veluchianus bushcrickets: Beneficial effects of nuptial feeding on offspring viability. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 45, 293–299 (1999).
doi: 10.1007/s002650050564
Markow, T. A. & Ankney, P. F. Insemination reaction in Drosophila: Found in species whose males contribute material to oocytes before fertilization. Evolution 42, 1097–1101 (1988).
pubmed: 28581170
Pitnick, S., Spicer, G. S. & Markow, T. Phylogenetic examination of female incorporation of ejaculates in Drosophila. Evolution 51, 833–845 (1997).
pubmed: 28568591
doi: 10.2307/2411158
Boggs, C. L. & Gilbert, L. E. Male Contribution to egg production in butterflies: Evidence for transfer of nutrients at mating. Science 206, 83–84 (1979).
pubmed: 17812454
doi: 10.1126/science.206.4414.83
Greenfield, M. D. The question of paternal investment in Lepidoptera: male-contributed proteins in Plodia interpunctella. Int. J. Invert. Reprod. 5, 323–330 (1982).
doi: 10.1080/01651269.1982.10553485
Koshiyama, Y., Tsumuki, H., Fujisaki, K. & Nakasuji, F. Nutritional contribution to females of 14C-labeled male secretions transferred during mating in Menida scotti (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Res. Popul. Ecol. 38, 51–56 (1996).
doi: 10.1007/BF02514970
Mullins, D. E. & Keil, C. B. Paternal investment of urates in cockroaches. Nature 283, 567–569 (1980).
doi: 10.1038/283567a0
Sirot, L. K., Lapointe, S. L., Shatters, R. & Bausher, M. Transfer and fate of seminal fluid molecules in the beetle, Diaprepes abbreviatus: Implications for the reproductive biology of a pest species. J. Insect Physiol. 52, 300–308 (2006).
pubmed: 16405989
doi: 10.1016/j.jinsphys.2005.11.009
Rooney, J. & Lewis, S. M. Differential allocation of male-derived nutrients in two lampyrid beetles with contrasting life-history characteristics. Behav. Ecol. 10, 97–104 (1999).
doi: 10.1093/beheco/10.1.97
Friedel, T. & Gillott, C. Contribution of male-produced proteins to vitellogenesis in Melanoplus sanguinipes. J. Insect Physiol. 23, 145–151 (1977).
pubmed: 858931
doi: 10.1016/0022-1910(77)90120-2
Markow, T. A., Coppola, A. & Watts, T. D. How Drosophila males make eggs: it is elemental. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268, 1527–1532 (2001).
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1673
Avila, F. W., Sirot, L. K., LaFlamme, B. A., Rubinstein, C. D. & Wolfner, M. F. Insect seminal fluid proteins: Identification and function. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 56, 21–40 (2011).
pubmed: 20868282
pmcid: 3925971
doi: 10.1146/annurev-ento-120709-144823
Gillott, C. Insect accessory reproductive glands: Key players in production and protection of eggs. In Chemoecology of Insect Eggs and Egg Deposition 37–59 (Springer, New York, 2003).
doi: 10.1002/9780470760253.ch2
Soller, M., Bownes, M. & Kubli, E. Mating and sex peptide stimulate the accumulation of yolk in oocytes of Drosophila Melanogaster. Eur. J. Biochem. 243, 732–738 (1997).
pubmed: 9057839
doi: 10.1111/j.1432-1033.1997.00732.x
Markow, T. A. & Ankney, P. F. Drosophila males contribute to oogenesis in a multiple mating species. Science 224, 302–303 (1984).
pubmed: 17734916
doi: 10.1126/science.224.4646.302
Pitnick, S., Miller, G. T., Schneider, K. & Markow, T. A. Ejaculate-female coevolution in Drosophila mojavensis. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, 1507–1512 (2003).
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2382
Soller, M., Bownes, M. & Kubli, E. Control of oocyte maturation in sexually mature Drosophila females. Dev. Biol. 208, 337–351 (1999).
pubmed: 10191049
doi: 10.1006/dbio.1999.9210
Kronja, I. et al. Widespread changes in the posttranscriptional landscape at the Drosophila oocyte-to-embryo transition. Cell Rep. 7, 1495–1508 (2014).
pubmed: 24882012
pmcid: 4143395
doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2014.05.002
Kronja, I. et al. Quantitative proteomics reveals the dynamics of protein changes during Drosophila oocyte maturation and the oocyte-to-embryo transition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 16023–16028 (2014).
pubmed: 25349405
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1418657111
pmcid: 4234593
Zhang, Z., Ahmed-Braimah, Y. H., Goldberg, M. L. & Wolfner, M. F. Calcineurin-dependent protein phosphorylation changes during Eeg activation in Drosophila melanogaster. Mol. Cell Proteom. 18, S145–S158 (2019).
doi: 10.1074/mcp.RA118.001076
Bownes, M. & Hames, B. D. Accumulation and degradation of three major yolk proteins in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Exp. Zool. 200, 149–156 (1977).
pubmed: 404389
doi: 10.1002/jez.1402000118
Lynn Zimmerman, J., Petri, W. & Meselson, M. Accumulation of a specific subset of D. melanogaster heat shock mRNAs in normal development without heat shock. Cell 32, 1161–1170 (1983).
doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(83)90299-4
Golumbeski, G. S., Bardsley, A., Tax, F. & Boswell, R. E. Tudor, a posterior-group gene of Drosophila melanogaster, encodes a novel protein and an mRNA localized during mid-oogenesis. Genes Dev. 5, 2060–2070 (1991).
pubmed: 1936993
doi: 10.1101/gad.5.11.2060
Johnstone, O. et al. Belle is a Drosophila DEAD-box protein required for viability and in the germ line. Dev. Biol. 277, 92–101 (2005).
pubmed: 15572142
doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2004.09.009
Riparbelli, M. G., Massarelli, C., Robbins, L. G. & Callaini, G. The abnormal spindle protein is required for germ cell mitosis and oocyte differentiation during Drosophila oogenesis. Exp. Cell Res. 298, 96–106 (2004).
pubmed: 15242765
doi: 10.1016/j.yexcr.2004.03.054
Styhler, S., Nakamura, A., Swan, A., Suter, B. & Lasko, P. Vasa is required for GURKEN accumulation in the oocyte, and is involved in oocyte differentiation and germline cyst development. Development 125, 1569–1578 (1998).
pubmed: 9521895
doi: 10.1242/dev.125.9.1569
Greenblatt, E. J., Obniski, R., Mical, C. & Spradling, A. C. Prolonged ovarian storage of mature Drosophila oocytes dramatically increases meiotic spindle instability. eLife 8, e49455 (2019).
pubmed: 31755866
pmcid: 6905857
doi: 10.7554/eLife.49455
Mermod, J.-J., Jacobs-Lorena, M. & Crippa, M. Changes in rate of RNA synthesis and ribosomal gene number during oogenesis of Drosophila melanogaster. Dev. Biol. 57, 393–402 (1977).
pubmed: 406151
doi: 10.1016/0012-1606(77)90224-X
Qian, S., Hongo, S. & Jacobs-Lorena, M. Antisense ribosomal protein gene expression specifically disrupts oogenesis in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 85, 9601–9605 (1988).
pubmed: 3144001
doi: 10.1073/pnas.85.24.9601
pmcid: 282811
Avilés-Pagán, E. E. & Orr-Weaver, T. L. Activating embryonic development in Drosophila. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 84, 100–110 (2018).
pubmed: 29448071
pmcid: 6301029
doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2018.02.019
Kaneuchi, T. et al. Calcium waves occur as Drosophila oocytes activate. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 791–796 (2015).
pubmed: 25564670
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1420589112
pmcid: 4311822
Cummings, M. R. & King, R. C. The cytology of the vitellogenic stages of oogenesis in Drosophila melanogaster. I. General staging characteristics. J. Morphol. 128, 427–441 (1969).
doi: 10.1002/jmor.1051280404
Heifetz, Y., Yu, J. & Wolfner, M. F. Ovulation triggers activation of Drosophila oocytes. Dev. Biol. 234, 416–424 (2001).
pubmed: 11397010
doi: 10.1006/dbio.2001.0246
Heifetz, Y., Tram, U. & Wolfner, M. F. Male contributions to egg production: the role of accessory gland products and sperm in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268, 175–180 (2001).
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1347
Antel, M. & Inaba, M. Modulation of cell–cell interactions in Drosophila oocyte development. Cells 9, 274 (2020).
pmcid: 7072342
doi: 10.3390/cells9020274
Schüpbach, T. & Wieschaus, E. Female sterile mutations on the second chromosome of Drosophila melanogaster I. Maternal effect mutations. Genetics 121, 101–117 (1989).
pubmed: 2492966
pmcid: 1203592
doi: 10.1093/genetics/121.1.101
Ali-Murthy, Z., Lott, S. E., Eisen, M. B. & Kornberg, T. B. An essential role for zygotic expression in the pre-cellular Drosophila embryo. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003428 (2013).
pubmed: 23593026
pmcid: 3616919
doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003428
Lupold, S. et al. How female x male and male x male interactions influence competitive fertilization in Drosophila melanogaster. Evol. Lett. (In press).
Pischedda, A., Stewart, A. D., Little, M. K. & Rice, W. R. Male genotype influences female reproductive investment in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 2165–2172 (2011).
pubmed: 21159677
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.2272
Ruhmann, H., Koppik, M., Wolfner, M. F. & Fricke, C. The impact of ageing on male reproductive success in Drosophila melanogaster. Exp. Gerontol. 103, 1–10 (2018).
pubmed: 29258876
doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2017.12.013
Sepil, I. et al. Male reproductive aging arises via multifaceted mating-dependent sperm and seminal proteome declines, but is postponable in Drosophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 117, 17094–17103 (2020).
pubmed: 32611817
doi: 10.1073/pnas.2009053117
pmcid: 7382285
Markow, T. A., Beall, S. & Matzkin, L. M. Egg size, embryonic development time and ovoviviparity in Drosophila species: Ovoviviparity in Drosophila species. J. Evol. Biol. 22, 430–434 (2009).
pubmed: 19032497
doi: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01649.x
Starmer, W. T. et al. Phylogenetic, geographic, and temporal analysis of female reproductive trade-offs in Drosophila. Evol. Biol. 33, 138–171 (2003).
Church, S. H., Donoughe, S., de Medeiros, B. A. S. & Extavour, C. G. Insect egg size and shape evolve with ecology, not developmental rate. bioRxiv 2018, 471946 (2018).
Markow, T. A. & O’Grady, P. M. Evolutionary genetics of reproductive behavior in Drosophila: Connecting the dots. Annu. Rev. Genet. 39, 263–291 (2005).
pubmed: 16285861
doi: 10.1146/annurev.genet.39.073003.112454
Krijgsveld, J. et al. Metabolic labeling of C. elegans and D. melanogaster for quantitative proteomics. Nat Biotechnol 21, 927–931 (2003).
pubmed: 12858183
doi: 10.1038/nbt848
McCullough, E. L., McDonough, C. E., Pitnick, S. & Dorus, S. Quantitative proteomics reveals rapid divergence in the postmating response of female reproductive tracts among sibling species. Proc. R Soc. B 287, 1030 (2020).
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2020.1030
Thurmond, J. et al. FlyBase 2.0: the next generation. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D759–D765 (2019).
pubmed: 30364959
doi: 10.1093/nar/gky1003
Gatto, L. & Lilley, K. S. MSnbase-an R/Bioconductor package for isobaric tagged mass spectrometry data visualization, processing and quantitation. Bioinformatics 28, 288–289 (2012).
pubmed: 22113085
doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr645
Smyth, G. K. limma: Linear models for microarray data. In Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Solutions Using R and Bioconductor (eds Gentleman, R. et al.) 397–420 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2005).
doi: 10.1007/0-387-29362-0_23
Huang, D. W., Sherman, B. T. & Lempicki, R. A. Bioinformatics enrichment tools: Paths toward the comprehensive functional analysis of large gene lists. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, 1–13 (2009).
doi: 10.1093/nar/gkn923
Szklarczyk, D. et al. STRING v11: Protein–protein association networks with increased coverage, supporting functional discovery in genome-wide experimental datasets. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D607–D613 (2019).
pubmed: 30476243
doi: 10.1093/nar/gky1131